[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - value 'basic_network' for keys 'network:type', 'lcn' and 'lwn'

[stevea]

A component of this that feels "missing" to me is:  what do the governments who put up the signs (or maybe they are not governments, but NGOs instead) call these things?  Do they define a "network" by this signage?  Do they define "a route" or "routes" or "a node-oriented network of routes?"  Perhaps even something different from those which you characterize as "basic_network?"  Is part of my / others / our problem that the creators of this "bicycle thing expressed with signs" is itself vaguely defined?

I read it (in English), I look at the pictures of signs and diagrams of "something" in the Proposal and while I straddle both of Volker's and Peter's confusion and "some emerging clarity but maybe not all the way there yet" it still seems vague.  What I mean by that is that it doesn't fit into the "basic, existing concepts" of how such a thing logically maps to OSM's data structures of nodes, ways and relations.  Again, there is bicycle infrastructure tagging and there are at least two kinds of bicycle route tagging — on-road and off-road/mtb.  These are quite different tagging schemes from one another, which complement each other and have good reasons for existing as the precise set of tags they are and are both documented as and rendered as.  Yet I still can't say whether this is "one of those" or "something else altogether."  And I need to know.

With "basic_network," and I'm trying, I really am burning some brain cells on this, it hasn't really yet gone from sparky ignition to fully burning in my mind.  I don't know if that is because the concept is poorly articulated by the creators of "it" (the thing, or the collection of things that make up the whole), maybe government maybe NGO.  I don't know if it is because while the Proposal tries, it started in another language and culture and simply is difficult to articulate to those who are not part of that culture.  I don't know if it is because it really doesn't logically map well (as a concept) to OSM's existing data structures, and after all, we are a database which wishes to logically map the real world.  But I and others remain a bit lost or bewildered even as we try, have a very open mind and are articulate (even loquacious!) with the concepts being "uttered" here.

The ball is certainly being kicked down the field towards the goal, but not quite a goal yet.  I'm not a referee, I'm a fan and I'm cheering.